FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3121783995> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3121783995 startingPage "239" @default.
• W3121783995 abstract "I. THE ROLE OF NECESSITY IN EMINENT DOMAIN A. Unnecessary Necessity: The Cases of Pequonnock and Poletown B. The Aftermath of Kelo v. City of New London: Has Public Outrage Prompted Meaningful Eminent Domain Reform? II. RUBBER STAMPS AND HIGH HURDLES A. Judicial Nonreviewability Invites Government Abuse B. Strict Scrutiny Review Would Unduly Interfere with Legislative Will III. TOWARD A MODEST REVIVAL OF NECESSITY IN EMINENT DOMAIN A. An Arbitrary and Capricious Standard is Too Lax B. The Less Drastic Means Test: Measured Judicial Review CONCLUSION Necessity is not a word to be taken lightly. The defense in criminal law can excuse criminal acts. (1) Manifest permits a court to declare a mistrial in a criminal proceeding. (2) The business defense permits employers to retain a discriminatory hiring policy. (3) Military condones armed conflict and the destruction of enemy property in wartime. (4) Dictionaries use words like indispensable, unavoidable, and imperative to define it. (5) Few doctrines have relied on the concept longer than domain. In 1625, Hugo Grotius, the Dutch jurist credited with coining the phrase eminent domain, described extreme necessity as one condition under which the State may alienate or destroy private property for a public purpose. (6) Necessity doctrine has influenced American land use since colonial times. As early as 1700, a Pennsylvania law required that no such road shall be carried through any man's improved lands, but where there is a for the same. (7) The concept appeared periodically in state court cases throughout the nineteenth century and remains present today. The doctrine is a fundamentally simple idea--a government entity may only take property via domain when it is necessary to further a proposed public use. (8) The burden of proof for establishing the of the taking rests on the condemning authority. (9) The landowner can present her own supporting evidence. If a court finds lack of necessity, it can prevent the proposed taking. (10) Eminent domain represents one of the government's most drastic non-penal incursions into individual rights. (11) requires that [private] owners relinquish their property without their consent, pitting private interests against a public good. (12) Common sense would suggest that a municipality must work to show sufficient to use domain. An domain taking can impose lasting trauma, and the power should not be used lightly. (13) Yet this common sense fails. In theory, is an important check against abusive government action. In practice, is a green light to seize almost any land a government entity wishes. The condemnor does not need to present plans, goals, feasibility studies, or other documentation, but must simply desire a parcel and be willing to pay for it. Judges have concluded en masse and with little debate that involuntary government land seizures require little judicial attention. Assuming other requirements apart from have been met, the result in practice is that the land a municipality wants, a municipality gets. Although many takings are genuinely beneficial and well-reasoned, the has become a fig leaf for government recklessness. In spite of this widespread judicial abdication, the requirement remains largely unexplored by scholars, who shine the spotlight on its far more popular and controversial cousin, the requirement of public use. (14) This Article proposes a modest revival of the requirement in domain. Part I explores the dormant state of doctrine. It also highlights examples of abuses of domain power afforded by a lack of constraint. …" @default.
• W3121783995 created "2021-02-01" @default.
• W3121783995 creator A5064505402 @default.
• W3121783995 date "2010-01-01" @default.
• W3121783995 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W3121783995 title "Reviving Necessity in Eminent Domain" @default.
• W3121783995 hasPublicationYear "2010" @default.
• W3121783995 type Work @default.
• W3121783995 sameAs 3121783995 @default.
• W3121783995 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W3121783995 countsByYear W31217839952015 @default.
• W3121783995 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3121783995 hasAuthorship W3121783995A5064505402 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConcept C166957645 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConcept C2776050585 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConcept C2776211767 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConcept C2776390805 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConcept C2776512386 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConcept C2779362956 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConcept C512654426 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConceptScore W3121783995C144024400 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConceptScore W3121783995C166957645 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConceptScore W3121783995C17744445 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConceptScore W3121783995C190253527 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConceptScore W3121783995C199539241 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConceptScore W3121783995C2776050585 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConceptScore W3121783995C2776211767 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConceptScore W3121783995C2776390805 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConceptScore W3121783995C2776512386 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConceptScore W3121783995C2778272461 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConceptScore W3121783995C2779362956 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConceptScore W3121783995C512654426 @default.
• W3121783995 hasConceptScore W3121783995C95457728 @default.
• W3121783995 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W3121783995 hasLocation W31217839951 @default.
• W3121783995 hasOpenAccess W3121783995 @default.
• W3121783995 hasPrimaryLocation W31217839951 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W137975431 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W142159228 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W1500841222 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W1522666978 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W1582280772 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W1602448418 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W1748112102 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W188039497 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W1997950886 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W2033359209 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W2260124205 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W2409778371 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W2481293976 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W2798081728 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W2972505464 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W3122115867 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W3123046454 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W3123145637 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W3123772222 @default.
• W3121783995 hasRelatedWork W3124332453 @default.
• W3121783995 hasVolume "33" @default.
• W3121783995 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3121783995 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3121783995 magId "3121783995" @default.
• W3121783995 workType "article" @default.